abandonconflict
Well-Known Member
Then it should not be so hard to cite some peer reviewed research which contradicts the vast majority of climate scientists.
record low maximum arctic sea ice
- Thread starter abandonconflict
- Start date
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
what i'd like to see is some evidence to support his assertion that AGW is a decades in the making hoax perpetrated by thousands of scientists in dozens of nations all over the globe.
you'd think with numbers like that, there's bound to be at least one whistleblower with evidence supporting the "hoax" theory, right?
abandonconflict
Well-Known Member
One "whistle blower" could be bought and a few emails wouldn't prove anything that would make an objective person doubt the overwhelming evidence from the research.what i'd like to see is some evidence to support his assertion that AGW is a decades in the making hoax perpetrated by thousands of scientists in dozens of nations all over the globe.
you'd think with numbers like that, there's bound to be at least one whistleblower with evidence supporting the "hoax" theory, right?
I'm just looking for a peer-reviewed study that actually contradicts the theory that is accepted by climate scientists. I'm willing to entertain their science if they can cite some.
freddfish
Well-Known Member
abandonconflict
Well-Known Member
That I'm still waiting for someone to cite a peer reviewed research study which contradicts the vast majority of climate scientists.
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
why do you think that equality can't be "naturally achieved" due to "the natural inability" of minorities?
isn't that the type of sentiment that white supremacists like david duke also espouse?
Its funny, AC keeps asking for this citation, but if you do give him a citation he just claims it isn't one, even if he originally claims that it was.
So don't take up the challenge, its too easy to dismiss it all when you have consensus on your side. All others are heretics and will be burned at the stake.
Remember when the earth was flat? Now those were the days of consensus. And peer reviewed up the ass.
So don't take up the challenge, its too easy to dismiss it all when you have consensus on your side. All others are heretics and will be burned at the stake.
Remember when the earth was flat? Now those were the days of consensus. And peer reviewed up the ass.
Sire Killem All
Well-Known Member
- Maintain humanity under 500,000,000 in perpetual balance with nature.
- Guide reproduction wisely — improving fitness and diversity.
- Unite humanity with a living new language.
- Rule passion — faith — tradition — and all things with tempered reason.
- Protect people and nations with fair laws and just courts.
- Let all nations rule internally resolving external disputes in a world court.
- Avoid petty laws and useless officials.
- Balance personal rights with social duties.
- Prize truth — beauty — love — seeking harmony with the infinite.
- Be not a cancer on the earth — Leave room for nature — Leave room for nature.
Sire Killem All
Well-Known Member
4 times the people breathing, smoking, driving, farting, ect, ect, then there was a 100 years ago......
abandonconflict
Well-Known Member
Nobody has provided a citation of a peer-reviewed research study including a link to it so that it can be verified, which contradicts the vast majority of climate scientists. Not even one. Plenty of magazine and newspaper articles and even half of a Wikipedia page, but not even one peer-reviewed research study.
Oh yeah, that half wiki page that you are still butthurt over. LOL
Let it go, that was like last year.
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
there was never a scientific consensus that the earth was flat.
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
says the guy who has me on ignore for pointing out what a plagiarizing racist liar he is.
abandonconflict
Well-Known Member
heckler73
Well-Known Member
What was the "peer reviewed" literature (however you wish to define it) you read which satisfied your qualifications of evidence, most recently? I think it would be useful if I had a reference of what you consider to be "valid". I would also appreciate a brief explanation as to why you consider it to be so. That way, perhaps, NoDrama's point can be indirectly addressed regarding your prior dismissals of work you deemed invalid.
Just one will be adequate, but not the IPCC report since it has to be something you've actually read (that also means no abstracts).
abandonconflict
Well-Known Member
Just
One
Even one?
A single, solitary, sole, undivided, uncompounded, unmixed, unitary individual peer-reviewed research study which contradicts the vast majority of climate scientists.
Please.
Just one.
heckler73
Well-Known Member
Yah, I'd like to see an example of what you call evidence which meets your high standards.
abandonconflict
Well-Known Member
Then that makes two of us.